Monsters and Heroes

A common plot for a heroic tale is one where a people are under threat from a supernatural monster or maybe a person possessed by great evil. The king is either unable or unwilling to defend the people from the threat, so a great hero emerges to do that which the king is supposed to do. The hero then goes off to face the threat, defeats it thus saving the people and writing his name in the book of heroes. Probably the oldest existing version of this is the Old English epic poem Beowulf.

Now, more sophisticated versions of this plot will bring the king into the story line by exploring the reasons he cannot or will not defend his people. Maybe the king is playing a double game, where he hopes to summon the hero, who he sees as the greater threat, in order to get him killed by the monster. Alternatively, the king is weak or incompetent, thus he represents failed leadership. His character in the story is a reminder of the risk of to a people tolerating bad leaders.

Now, with that in mind, fast forward to the current age and consider what is happening in American public life. For starters, we have an economic system that cannot be described as anything but predatory. The issue has become so acute, even The Wall Street Journal has had to take note. The reason for the collapse of the America middle class is well known. The active efforts to suppress wages, while maintaining a usurious financial system, is draining the life out of the middle-class.

Again, the reasons for this are fairly well understood and, more important, we know who is behind the policies causing it. People have been writing about the financialization of the economy since the 1970’s. Way back when Wall Street convinced Congress they should auction off the manufacturing base, analysts on the Right and Left identified the prime mover behind this phenomenon. The monster that is savaging the people is well known, yet the king does nothing to defend his people.

Concomitant with the financial collapse of the middle-class has been the spiritual and cultural collapse. Probably the most symbolic aspect of this is the opioid crisis, which has put its icy hand on every shoulder of society. It’s not just an urban thing like prior drug epidemics or a class thing like crime. Look at the number of high profile people who ended up in a rehab facility after getting hooked on pain killers. Every week, the nation’s obituaries are full of stories about opioid related deaths.

Again, this is not some great mystery. On the one hand, you have people like the Sackler family who basically got a license to kill. They used it to flood the nation with legal drugs and induced doctors to hand them out like candy. Similarly, the flood of fentanyl from Mexico is well understood. We know who is doing this to the American people, yet the people in charge barely acknowledge it. The monster that is savaging the people is well known, yet the king does nothing to defend his people.

We have spent three years being lectured by our betters about those clever Russians and their Facebook ads, threatening our democracy. It was a giant hoax, of course, and we know why the hoaxers perpetuated it. They were covering up a seditious plot to subvert the 2016 election. The fact that it was a hoax does not mean there are no threats to the political order. We know, for example, that the tech giants are deliberately trying to subvert the democratic processes.

Again, this is not some mysterious thing that is just coming to light. It has been happening for a long time now. Here we have Silicon Valley trying to bully British media outlets to not interview Farage. Here we have a former Google exec explaining how his former employer interferes in elections. What’s happening with these tech oligopolies is not some great puzzle that has just coming to light. The monster that is savaging the people is well known, yet the king does nothing to defend his people.

The pattern is unmistakable. Time after time the people come under threat from a well understood enemy of bourgeois order and time after time the people in charge do nothing about it. Only the most naive think the Epstein affair or the massive corruption in the FBI will be addressed. At this point, everyone knows the plot. The flow of stories will slow to a trickle and then the whole thing will be forgotten. In time, Epstein’s plotters will be partying with the FBI plotters at Lois Lerner’s Vineyard mansion.

The people are under threat by a variety of monsters. It’s not just Grendel, but Grendel’s mother and the whole extended family. The people in charge, whether out of fear, avarice or degeneracy do nothing about these threats. People thought the Orange Knight was the hero, who could slay the monsters and bring peace to the people, but thus far he has remained under his desk, posting insults on Twitter. In fact, the king sees the hero as a greater threat than the monsters that savage his people.

If our version of this tale is to be recounted in future generations, the plot will have to take a different turn. Ours will have to be the version where the people, seeing the king undermine and plot against the hero, finally realize that the real monster vexing them is the one who rules over them. Every society is under threat from monsters, often ones they created or allowed to develop in their ranks. The people who survive are those who figure it out and either find a hero to slay the monster or do the job themselves.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

The White Fright

One of the features of current year America is the occurrence of panics, particularly among the managerial elite. The most recent is the White Fright, where the media is hysterically reporting every disturbance as the act of white supremacists. This panic appears to have been triggered by the El Paso shooting, but it is a manifestation of a much longer occurring paranoia among the managerial classes. It dates back to at least the last presidential election and has roots in the Obama years.

The underlying assumption of the White Fright is a belief that whites are secretly organizing to overthrow the current order and impose some sort of pale patriarchy on the country. These white supremacists are everywhere and look just like normal everyday white people, so any white person could possibly be one of them. These people can, at any moment, turn into a violent spree killer, if exposed to certain kinds of content called “hate speech” which is found on-line.

The similarities to medieval witch hunting are too obvious not to notice. The adversary is not something that appears in material form. Like Old Scratch, white supremacy is an evil spirit that works through the infected. Once under the control of white supremacy, the person no longer has agency. Not surprisingly, like the accused witches in Salem, the modern white supremacist is most likely to be someone that vexes the moral authorities, either by their presence or by their actions.

Now, many on the Right have been conditioned to look at this stuff and come up with an explanation that makes the Left seem less nutty. For example, Steve Sailer will argue it is a clever ploy to rally the coalition of the ascendant. The National Review types will claim it is a ploy to conceal the fact that Democrats are the real racists. These are conditioned responses that are not intended to explain what’s going on with the Left, but to fit it into the normal Left-Right dynamic that describes America politics.

A more nuanced explanation is that the White Fright is part of a great fear that is sweeping the managerial classes. Like that which swept France in the summer of 1789, this fear is rooted in both the economic and the social problems of society. There’s also a paranoia about the ruling class. These people are riddled with angst and fear of being dropped from the managerial class. This causes them to be highly sensitive to any disruption in society and as a result, they are prone to panics.

The media, internet censors, social justice warriors and corporate HR departments are the servants of the ruling class. As such, they are wholly dependent upon them for their status with regards to the rest of us. Unlike the commoners, who are only vaguely aware that there are powerful people behind the political theater, the managerial class is much more aware of this reality. As a result, they live like the peasants of France, keenly aware they are dependent upon people they cannot trust.

This anxiety manifests itself as panics about imaginary villains plotting to topple the existing order. The Russia hoax is a good example. It is assumed that the people peddling it did so for cynical reasons and that may be true. The people spreading and repeating it, however, were motivated by a genuine fear of dark forces working in the shadows against their interests. Marianne Williamson got a lot of attention in the last debate by mentioning “dark psychic forces.” It resonated with certain people.

Now, another possible explanation for the White Fright is that something similar to what happened in Salem is going on in current year America. At the end of the 17th century, what amounted to a Puritan theocracy, had taken root in New England. Everything about social life was controlled by the religious sensibilities of the people, mostly enforced by a narrow theocratic elite. The form and purpose of New England towns was based in the religious understanding of the people we now call Puritans.

This model, when facing the challenge of witch panics, was unable to adapt and cope with the phenomenon. The response from the religious authorities decreased public trust and eroded their authority. The trials themselves, instead of reducing fear among the panicked, increased suspicions. Before long it became obvious that the religious authorities were as much a part of the problem as the people making accusations and spreading rumors. The witch trials discredited Puritanism.

That could be what is happening in current year America. The similarities between modern Progressivism and Puritanism, in its manifestations, not theologically, is hard not to notice. Everything from vinegar drinking scolds to their effeminate male enablers are present in modern day Progressivism. Current year America is ruled by a bizarre identity cult that is every bit as superstitious as the Puritans. The White Fright may turn out to be the witch scares of late empire America.

Those are all the amusing and gratuitous explanations for what we are seeing. There is another possibility and that is a genuine fear rooted in real danger. The response by the managerial class may seem hysterical and irrational, but maybe that is just a byproduct of mass media culture. Maybe there is a real threat. The people running from the monster, shrieking like madmen, are not acting rationally, but their fear is not irrational either. The monster is real and is a real danger to them.

It should be noted that panic is not the default response to disasters or dangers. In things like fires, natural disasters and combat, panic is not typical. Instead, mutual aid is the most common response. An obvious example is the response of the people in the World Trade Center buildings during 9/11. Among the stories of great heroism were stories of incredible cooperation. People came together and helped one another get out of the buildings. Mutual aid and cooperation was the natural response.

Rather than a panic or mass hysteria, the White Fright may be a call to familiarity and mutual aid by the managerial class. The old political order is breaking down, as the inevitable consequences of multiculturalism manifest. What we could be seeing is a primal call for social re-attachment. The primary purveyors of the White Fright are white, or at least white presenting. The old good-white coalition is rallying around the fear of white supremacy, in defense of what is lurking outside the walls.

Of course, all of these possible explanations for the panics we are seeing are rooted in the general sense that society is fragmenting. That’s because current year America is fragile and possibly ready to shatter. The old political order is in decline and the rise of identity politics promises to replace it. These panics are as much about the fear of what comes next as superstition or immediate threats. The White Fright may one day be seen as the turning point in the rise of white identity politics.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

Post Soviet America

Way back in the late stages of the Cold War, the Soviet political class started to fracture and splinter. The reform movement of Gorbachev was one faction, while the old guard that resisted him was another. There were other factions playing both sides against one another, as well as genuine reformers on the fringe. The reason the ruling elite was splintering was the system over which they ruled was no longer functioning. This reality was becoming clear to many, but not everyone in the party agreed.

Intrigue began to dominate party politics in the final stages of the Soviet Union. There was always politics within the party, but it revolved around the ruling center, much as court intrigue would revolve around the king. As the system began to falter, that center collapsed and party politics was conspiracies within conspiracies, as factions jockeyed for power. Eventually, the system collapsed and the party with it. What followed was a period of looting by oligarchs that rushed into to fill the void.

It is an important thing to think about when analyzing what’s happening in current year America. In the West, the response to the end of the Cold War was the replacement of the old sober minded political class with their self-absorbed, amoral children. The most notable example being Bill and Hillary Clinton, who have come to symbolize Baby Boomer political culture. Theirs is a politics of limitless mendacity. Everything is for sale, including the very institution over which they preside.

In other words, the Soviet Empire fell into a period of chaos and disorder in response to the end of the Cold War, while America fell into a period of self-indulgence. This way of framing it is like two sports teams after a championship match. The losers fall into finger pointing and blaming one another. The winners go on a bender to celebrate their victory and the benefits that come with it. Eventually, the loser regroups. In the case of Russia, it is becoming a normal country again.

There may be another way of reading the post-Soviet period in America. It may be that the period ushered in by the Clintons was an interregnum.  Both sides of the Cold War were purpose built to face off against one another. The Russians bankrupted themselves with an ineffective organizational model, so the end of the Cold War brought a genuine collapse, as that was the only way forward. In America, the country was still rich, so the old model could trundle on as if nothing really changed.

This interregnum was a period where the old political order carried on searching for an enemy to replace the Soviets. First it was the Muslims, which gave us two ghastly wars of choice and the surveillance state. That weakened America greatly, but instead of facing the long overdue reorganization, the political class tried reinventing the Russian bogeyman. Now, as in late stage Soviet Russia, the political center has collapsed and we are entering a similar period of chaos and intrigue.

Like the Soviets, we have oligarchs jockeying to loot what’s left the country, seemingly uninterested in staving off collapse. Big Tech and Wall Street have all the signs of super-predators from another planet, waiting for the chance to rush in and steal whatever they think has value. Like Gorbachev’s government at the end, official Washington is weak, while a populist reform movement builds. Trump is not Boris Yeltsin, but no historic analogy is intended to be perfect.

Of course, there came a point in the late stages of the Soviet Union where the emerging power centers outside the party, what would become the oligarchs, resorted to violence in their struggles with one another and the party. This is something that is starting to turn up more and more in America. Starting with the execution of Seth Rich on a Washington street, through the explosion of Antifa violence, the country is now buzzing with conspiracy over the bizarre death of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein.

That is another thing we are seeing in America that was common toward the end of the Soviet Union. The public is so cynical about the motives and character of the ruling class, that no one believes anything. The fake news meme was effective because trust in the media had dropped to zero. The lies had simply accumulated to the point where no rational person could accept anything from the media at face value. The continued existence of mainstream media just increases the cynicism.

Now, something not reported in the old Soviet Union that we are seeing in current year America is the panic. We are currently in the midst of a White Fright, where the media is tasked with casting daily events as signs of a white supremacist uprising. The coalition of the ascendant is being told to lock their doors and remain vigilante, as the twelfth invisible Hitler is slated to return at any minute. Like the Russia hoax, this one is a ruling class hoax that suggests a breakdown at the very top.

Again, it is not a perfect analogy. That’s not how analogies work. That said, there are important differences between the end of Cold War America and the end of Cold War Russia. The interregnum between the end of the Cold War and current year America is one example. Another is the nature of the oligarchs ready to seize power from Washington. They are foreign in outlook, if not legality. The tech barons and Wall Street financiers have loyalties that transcend any attachment to nation.

These new oligarchs are globalists, while the Russian oligarchs were local. The oligarchs of current year America are anti-nationalists, seeking a post-national world order. Their desire is to turn the heart of the American Empire into just another province. There’s also a class consciousness to their enablers. The managerial elite see themselves as a new class, tasked with administering the new global order. These are not men for hire, as we saw in Russia. These are true believers.

There’s also the fact that the American military is a different thing than what evolved in the Soviet Union. The Russian military was quite comfortable involving itself in politics, while the America military lacks the talent and culture to do it. Civilian leaders in America have always been smart enough to choose obsequious and incompetent generals to run the military branches. The talent is down a few ranks. The culture of the military would not lend itself to political involvement either.

Even so, what all of this suggests is America is headed for a period of chaos similar to what gripped the Russians after the Cold War. Just as the Russian oligarchs were too greedy and short sighted to replace the party, our oligarchs are too foreign and feckless to provide an alternative to Washington. A period of chaos in probably what comes next for post-Soviet America. The sudden collapse of empire and then a reversion to its natural state after a period of chaos and violence.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

Technological Despotism

In the 1990’s, it was popular for conservatives to excuse their impotence by throwing around the line, “In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve”, which they attributed to Tocqueville. So-called conservatives like Newt Gingrich were supposed to be idea men, brimming with technocratic solutions to every problem, while Clinton was a windy degenerate from a bygone era. The fact that the voters sided with Clinton over conservatives reflected poorly on the people.

The quote, of course, was not from Tocqueville. It was actually Joseph de Maistre, who coined that phrase. It was oddly symbolic of the state of conservatism. They had turned their back on everything that defined Western conservatism by that point, so forgetting seminal figures in the intellectual tradition of the Right was appropriate. In retrospect, the fact that the so-called conservatives did not understand the word “people” in the context of the quote was the most poignant error.

Putting that aside, the quote itself is a nice shorthand for the actual truth that lies behind those words. The people get the ruling elite they can produce and that ruling elite will then create a government that reflects its nature. The condition of the people is reflected in the morality of its ruling class. At the same time, the ruling class is responsible for the people. Its duty is to advance their interests. In this way, the pivot point of a people is its ruling class. It is what they make of it.

The founding generation of America were men of civic virtue. The saw the willingness to put the interests of the community ahead of private interests, as the threshold item for a leader. As a result, they rejected the monarchical system of government they inherited from England and created a republic. The constitutional system they created was based on the assumption that, in general, the sort of men who would rise to prominence were men who prized civic virtue. The Constitution reflected this.

That turned out to be the fatal flaw of the constitutional order created in Philadelphia two centuries ago. While the system of checks and balances worked to prevent the ambitious and unscrupulous from gaining politician power, it was not built for the ruling elite that would evolve in the 19th century. When the North conquered the country, America became a nascent empire. It still reflected the founding order, but its elite was now changing to reflect the changing nature of America.

The ruling elite the evolved after the Civil War and into the Industrial Revolution did not place civic virtue at the top of its moral order. Instead, it was the desire for and the love of honor that motivated the ruling classes. They quickly reorganized the government to reflect this reality. Rank and status were now the coin of the realm. Whether it was dominating some area of the economy or conquering foreign lands, the path to attaining rank and status was though government and politcs.

You can see this in the type of men who occupied high office. Before the Civil War, the leadership of the country were men who either got rich before entering government, or they were born rich. This was the result of a natural ruling class that reflected the human capital of the people. After the war, there emerged men who made their names in government. Their path to high status was not as natural leaders of their community, but as shrewd operators in the political system.

The obvious example is Abraham Lincoln, who is treated as the Moses of the second founding by the previous ruling class. This was not a man who prized civic virtue or was a natural community leader. Instead, he craved status and power. He attained those through the skillful maneuvering through politics and then through the brutal use of force to create a political order that reflected this new ruling class. For those who wonder when America will have its Sulla, look no further than Lincoln.

Every phase of an elite runs its course and this one is no different. The ruling class that evolved after the Civil War through the Cold War was built for a different age. It was industrial and it was geared to a world of industrial competition. What kept it going long after its peak was the Cold War. The stand-off with communism not only locked the New Deal political order in place, it locked in place the status system of the ruling elite. That system, thirty years after the Cold War, is now giving way to something new.

The technological age, like the industrial age, is the accelerant for a long overdue transformation of the American ruling elite. This new class is no longer created and housed within the political class. It exists outside of it, within its own power centers inside and outside of government. The intelligence services, for example, are now an independent power center, beyond the reach of Congress. Silicon Valley and Wall Street are now more powerful than Washington.

This new ruling class has a unique motivation. The elite of the republic was defined by civic virtue. The elite of the empire was defined by status and rank. This new ruling elite will be defined by the fear it instills in the public. In the technological age, fear of the oligarchs will be the supreme public virtue. Fear will be ruthlessly and creatively inculcated by a ruling elite that is wholly disconnected from the people over whom it rules. This stage of America will be the age of technological despotism.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

Biological Feudalism

The nature of all human society is that there is an elite that sits atop the society, providing both order and structure to the whole. Because the apple does not fall far from the tree, elites tend to be inherited. The sons and daughters of the ruling class make up the next generation’s ruling class. In Guatemala, for example, a small number of families have controlled the country since the 16th century. Despite what the science deniers will tell you, biology is a real thing and it matters.

In the West, this biological reality has been tempered by an understanding that men of merit can be found in the lower ranks. Cultural pathways evolved for these men to earn their way into the elite. Originally this meant warfare. A great warrior and leader of men could earn his way into the elite. Some of the great aristocratic names of England, for example, were founded by the sword in The Hundred Years War. Later, intellectual and economic prowess became pathways to high status.

Now, in the Middle Ages, as Europe settled into a patchwork of ethnic groups, those pathways were shutoff for people outside the dominant ethnicity. Most obviously, Jews were blocked from holding high offices or ruling over Christians. In the late Roman Empire and into the early Middle Ages, these prohibitions did not exist, so there were very powerful Jews in what is now Italy, Spain and France. They often played a major role in the succession of kings and the naming of bishops.

What came to be the norm in Eurasia is that the ruling elite was biologically of the people over whom it ruled. In the case of conquered people, their elites operated like vassals, reporting to the elite that ruled over them. This is the naturally occurring nationalism that Yoram Hazony promotes for his people. Jews rule over Jewish lands and Jewish people for the good of the Jewish people. Those minority populations that happen to be in the way must sublimate themselves to the interests of Israel.

This is not the model everywhere. In most of the Middle East, a small minority will rule over the rest. The Alawites rule over the much larger tribes in Syria. In Iraq under Saddam Hussein, his tribe, al-Begat, ruled over the rest. His tribe was also of the much smaller Sunni sect. In fact, the history of the Middle East, going back to the classic period, is the story of small groups gaining control over large areas of diverse people, who outnumber their new rulers by significant margins.

South America is another model where the naturally occurring nationalism of Eurasia does not prevail. Throughout South America, the ruling class is very European in appearance and custom. They sit atop a large mixed race population that is often tribal, regional and multilingual. Look at the political elite of these countries and they are very white. In contrast, look at their populations and they resemble what the American Left imagines for Ohio one day. It’s biological feudalism.

This organizational system is why America is being overrun with migrants. In order for biological feudalism to work, the people at the top have to be able to feed and control the population. It’s why revolution has been a feature of South American politics since they broke free from Europe. One faction within the elite takes advantage of the other, by rallying some portion of the swarthy masses that are unhappy. Revolution is really just a family spat over control of the country.

It’s why everyone agrees Venezuela is a problem. There, the coalition of the swarthy actually took over country. You’ll note that in a group photo of South American leaders, Maduro is easy to spot. Granted, there’s a lot of oil and gas to be sucked out of the country by North America firms, but the reason the rest of South America has never embraced the Venezuelan leaders is they represent a threat to the biological feudalism that is the norm in South America.

In order to make biological feudalism work, the people at the top have to be homogeneous and they have to be ruthless. Settling political disputes within a narrow elite works when that narrow elite is what amounts to an extended family. This was what European feudalism relied upon to maintain order. If parts of the elite have loyalties that transcend that of the ruling elite, then fracture is inevitable. People will ruthlessly defend their own from outsiders. It is human nature.

That’s why this model is unlikely to work in America. The ruling elite is too diverse to operate like an extended family. Even in the Imperial Capital, where everyone knows everyone, outside loyalties loom large. At Yoram Hazony’s conference, many of the attendees see America as a resource center for their tribe’s war in the Levant. These are not people who will sacrifice for the good of America or the American elite. Their relationships in Washington are purely transactional.

That’s what you see happening with the Democrat Party. They want to be a coalition that is white presenting at the top, with maybe some token color, and the new coalition of the ascendant at the bottom. The trouble is, they seem to lack the willpower and ruthlessness to do it. They just purged leadership staff because they are too white. The tribes of the coalition don’t know their place and the only way they can know their place is if the ruling elite puts them in their place.

Most likely, the sort of system we will see in the post-national, majority-minority America is one ruled by narrow power centers. Silicon Valley will control the public space, but work with Wall Street, which controls the economy. The intelligence services, with their monopoly of force, will be another power center. These power centers will be controlled by a small number of clans. The farce of modern democracy will simply become a ritual that is managed by these power centers to their own advantage.

Whether or not this is possible is debatable. The dirty secret of South America is their organizational model was just an evolution of the colonial model, supported by North America and Europe. Pull away the support of the home culture and the natives most likely would have eaten their elites a long time ago. The South American system transplanted to North America, without external support, may just quickly devolve into chaos, warlordism and then old fashioned authoritarianism.

Support the media that supports you. While all of us toiling in the fields of dissident media are motivated by a sense of duty, having a place to sleep and food on the table still requires money. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. Or, you can send money to me at: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. I now have a PayPal setup for those who prefer that method to donate. Thank you for your support!

A Future of Cults & Subcultures

In modern usage, the word “cult” is entirely negative. It conjures the image of a strange religious group or maybe a charismatic madman claiming to be Jesus. In the former case, the group will have unusual beliefs, isolate themselves from the rest of society and maybe prepare for some prophesied event. Jim Jones or David Koresh are what comes to mind for most people in the latter case. Of course, there’s always the example of the suicide cult, which gave us the expression “pass the Kool-Aid.”

The word “cult” comes from the Latin word cultus, which meant the care owed to a deity, shrine or temple. In the ancient world, cults were common. They could be built around maintaining a particular shrine, which had been built for a deity, a great hero or even a legendary event. The people in the cult maintained the shrine and served the needs of pilgrims. The same was true of temples and even churches. In the ancient world, cults were just a normal part of everyday life.

This was true outside the Roman world, as well. For example, the Vikings did not have a word for what we would call religion. Instead, they had words to describe the public cult, to which everyone belonged, and words for the private cults that people maintained in their homes and villages. The public cult was what bound the people together with common rituals and celebrations, while the private cult was what held the family together. The concept of the household god, for example, was common.

This old idea of the cult is worth thinking about in the current age, as multiculturalism shatters traditional communities and the traditional customs of the people. Without something to organize people on the large scale, even a regional scale, something will inevitably organize them on the small scale. This was the traditional role of cults in the ancient world. They evolved locally to be local. Put another way, they were a local solution to a universal problem. They gave people purpose and meaning.

In modern America, as the shared national identity recedes, something will fill the void and most likely it will be something like the ancient concept of the cult. Of course, with the internet, local becomes a relative term. People of the same cult or subculture, can feel like they are close to one another, by participating is private on-line groups. These subcultures will become that which people primarily identify with in public. Another aspect of identity politics will be the many subcultures and cults that spring up.

Take for example the antisemitic community. It used to be that people who hated Jews were called anti-Semites. One could be an Episcopalian and be an anti-Semite. Not liking Jews was just one of many attributes to describe someone. Later, the term shifted to mean people who were hated by Jews. If Jews thought someone was a problem for the Jews, then they were described as an anti-Semite. The anti-Zionists, even the Jewish ones, are always called antisemitic, for example.

Today, some of that still holds, but antisemitism is much more complex now than just a dislike for Jews or Israel. Antisemitism is quickly becoming a unique and complex subculture with its own language, symbols and literature. Kevin McDonald was amusingly called the Karl Marx of antisemitism, but it is a good description. His three books on the Jews are now the foundation of a complex and sophisticated understanding of Jews and the people who have organized themselves around opposition to the Jews.

Of course, modern Judaism is evolving into cults as well. The Chabad movement, for example, has gone beyond being a weird orthodox subculture. It is now an international secret society with observation posts in every Western capital. They even have one of their guys in the White House. Zionism, as practiced by people like Ben Shapiro and Yoram Hazony, ticks all the boxes of a cult. Everything they touch is manipulated to fit into their worldview and the purpose of Zionism.

The subcultures evolving in regards to the Jews are just one type of cult that will probably be a feature of the coming age. Secular gurus like Jordan Peterson or Stephan Molyneux are going to become more common. It’s fair to say that both would have fit in well on the revival circuit back in the old days. Instead of healing people in tent revivals, they heal people on-line with therapeutic language. The multicultural future will be a new age of prophets and holy men, building communities around their teachings.

Now, America has never had a unifying culture. Regionalism and subcultures have been the defining feature of America since the founding. Civic nationalism, however, provided a universal framework within which all of these subcultures and regional identities could operate without generating social conflict. Much like the Vikings, America was a land with a public cult, civic nationalism and patriotism, and many private cults. You could be a southern redneck and a proud American at the same time.

That’s unlikely to be the future. For starters, the old system relied upon a primary loyalty to the national creed, even among the rich. That’s falling away, especially with the rich, who no longer have any loyalty to the people over whom they rule. Then there is the transparency of modern life. Mass communications means everyone can see how different everyone else is living, relative to their subculture. The Zionists and anti-Semites can follow one another in ways that were unimaginable decades ago.

The old line about familiarity breeding contempt will surely be true of the future. Because these evolving subcultures will know a lot about their competitors, they will evolve in opposition to them as well. You see this with what’s going on between the Zionists and the anti-Semites. They are growing in complexity, but also their animosity toward one another is becoming more complex. In the future, maintaining boundaries will be what matters, not finding ways to break down boundaries and cooperate.

Support the media that supports you. While all of us toiling in the fields of dissident media are motivated by a sense of duty, having a place to sleep and food on the table still requires money. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. Or, you can send money to me at: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. I now have a PayPal setup for those who prefer that method to donate. Thank you for your support!

Orange Versus Black

Just when you thought it was safe, after the Mueller testimony was a colossal flop, President Trump finds a way to get everyone outraged all over again. His tweets about Congressman Elijah Cummings and his congressional district, have all the usual suspects pointing and sputtering. Given the amount of pointing and sputtering they have had to do the last three years, it is a miracle that they can even sputter. It should not be possible to be outraged for three years, but here we are.

Of course, the usual suspects are howling about the racism, as Cummings is black and his district is a black carve out. It includes some of the worst parts of Baltimore city, which means the mostly black parts. The district is about 30% white, which is why Cummings wins his elections with ease. In 2018 he won with 76% of the vote. If you are white and trapped in one of these districts, voting is pointless. In fact, voting for anyone is pointless as the results are known in advance.

As is custom with these types of districts, Cumming is as crooked as a ram’s horn. His wife runs a shady charity that gets millions from people with business in front the Congressman’s committee. He also seems to have some connection with the recent scandal that brought down the last mayor of Baltimore. In one of his tweets, Trump mentioned the corruption. It should be pretty easy to run a sting on Cummings, but he is off limits for the reason everyone knows, but does not say.

Of course, no one will bother disputing the facts of Trump’s tweets. That’s a dangerous subject that must never be mentioned. Any examination of Baltimore would not only reveal Trump is right, but also reveal those things we all know are true, but are told we must never mention. Baltimore is a black city and the highest crime areas are the blackest areas. For example, 92.9% of those arrested for murder are black and 91% of their victims are black. Crime in Baltimore is a black thing.


Of course, this is something everyone knows to be true. In fact, no one alive in modern America has ever lived in a time when people were puzzled about the nature of crime, with regards to race. The reason the urban hipsters exist is their hipster neighborhoods were ethnically cleansed of non-whites, mostly blacks. Giuliani cleaned up Manhattan by having the police put out the unwelcome mat for blacks. The stop and frisk policy was a success, because it relied on those assumptions about race and crime.

This link between race and crime is so well understood, efforts to conceal it have become a meme on social media. For example, when the news says they are looking for teens involved in a wilding incident, everyone knows what it means. Here’s one from Washington. The same thing is true for the party shootings, which always have a certain color to them. Here’s one from the current news. Shootings at block parties are like shootings at hip-hop concerts. Everyone knows what it means.

Of course, black crime is a young black male problem. When the Obama Administration tried to make the case that the cops are racists, they learned that the cops are probably not racist enough. In their report on crime, they found that young black males are 3% of the population and near 30% of homicides. Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders. The offending rate for blacks (34.4 per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000).

The fact is, crime in Baltimore, like everywhere in America, is a black thing. The internent meme “1350” works because it is something everyone knows, even if they don’t know the exact details. Even when the issue is contained in certain sections of cities, people are made painfully aware of this reality, because crime in the hood does not stay in the hood. Every white person in America has a story in their family tree that involves leaving the old neighborhood because it went bad.

That brings us back to Trump. In sane world, his noticing the obvious should not be front page news, but we don’t live in a sane age. As the legendary quantitative blogger said long ago, “There are very few moments in a man’s existence when he experiences so much hostility, or meets with so little benevolence, as when he challenges fashionable perceptions of race.” Trump is about to face a fury of hostility from the usual suspects that no man has withstood in the past.

In fact, one of the usual suspects responsible for inflicting Barak Obama on the country is predicting that this is the Gettysburg of his presidency. From the perspective of the usual suspects, of course, Trump is Lee in this analogy. Like Charlottesville, this event will be the rallying cry for the Left until the election. Whatever other issues come up in the next year and a half, the 2020 election will be about race, specifically the old Progressive view of race versus one based in observable reality.

That is fundamentally the choice before us. Do we want to accept the Progressive view on the human condition, slowly sinking into the desperate, grinding poverty of a place like Baltimore? Or, we will not accept that and do what is required to prevent America from becoming a multicultural ghetto ruled by and parasitic elite? That’s what Baltimore is right now. It is a vision of tomorrow that no one should welcome. It does not have to be that way, but the only way to prevent it is to face it.

Support the media that supports you. While all of us toiling in the fields of dissident media are motivated by a sense of duty, having a place to sleep and food on the table still requires money. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. Or, you can send money to me at: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. I now have a PayPal setup for those who prefer that method to donate. Thank you for your support!

The Age Of Anti-Knowledge

One of the funny things about this age is how the political poles seem to be swapping positions on a great many issues. The Right, for example, is now more concerned with the plight of the working man than the Left, while the Left is a fanatical defender of global capitalism. If 1980 man were transported to the present, he could be forgiven for thinking Tucker Carlson is a liberal. He uses the kind of language that was common on the Left in response to the rise of conservatism.

That does not mean Tucker is a liberal. It just means what we understand to be Left and Right are not fixed, timeless positions. They are just words used for “us” and “them” in the game of politics. Conservatism, properly understood, was always skeptical of capitalism, because it tended to destroy indiscriminately. Bulldozing a church to build a processing center may be a more efficient use of resources, but conservatives always knew the altar was the keystone of civilization, not the factory.

As is always the case, the Left has the ability to create and define its opponents, because it controls the institutions. Forty years ago it created the image of a conservative as a ruthless, cold-hearted capitalist, in order to have an enemy they could more easily manipulate. They never cared about the poor or the working classes and never opposed rule by corporation. The Left in America is an effort to explain why inequality prevails despite the fact man is born equal.

Thinking of the American Left, at least the old Protestant aspects of it, as a theodicy, is a good way to understand why the people who used to sport Darwin fish on their Volvo are now extreme science deniers. Steve Sailer has been following the new star on the denialist scene, Angela Saini, who is getting famous waging jihad against observable reality. Her latest fatwa has been published on the site called Nature, which is ironic, given the article is a rebuke of nature.

Saini is not the only primitive showing up in the prestige press, shaking her staff at the heavens, demanding the gods conform to her dictates. Cordelia Fine was the toast of the town a couple years ago, when she published a book claiming reality is a magic trick played on us by hobgoblins. She did not put it that way. Her case was actually much weaker and less coherent. Greg Cochran’s review of her book reads like someone correcting a child or possibly a simpleton.

Of course, the over-the-top science denialism we see in the prestige press is filtering down to the rest of the cult. They don’t bother with the arguments, instead preferring to repeat the catch phrases. The extremely long-winded YouTuber, Alt-Hype, reviewed a chubby left-wing incel, who is making a name for himself as a science denier. JF Gariepy has a shorter version. The even shorter version is the lefty incels are now denying the very basics of biology.

If you are over the age of forty, this is quite a development. Within living memory, to be a Progressive meant mocking religious people of all types, but especially Evangelicals, as science denying primitives. The Left waved around evolution like a magic talisman, dismissing any argument they deemed religious, by which they meant cultural. Even Obama mocked Christians this way when he was running in 2008. Progressives bleeping loved science, while their enemies loved magic.

The change in tone and language among some right-wingers, like Tucker Carlson, is a bit jarring, but once you get past the superficial, it makes sense. In the 1980’s, a right-wing regard for the public good would not have focused on things like affordable family formation or wage stagnation in the heartland. The excesses of cosmopolitan globalism would not have entered their minds, because those things did not exist. It took time and hard experience to learn that Pat Buchanan was right after all.

What’s happening with the Left seems to be different. It is not an adjustment to new information or a changing culture. For a very long time, the human sciences understood that the variety we see in the human family is rooted in nature. Even those who dispute the validity of evolutionary biology on religious grounds, fully acknowledged that God does not distribute his gifts equally. The Left argued that these difference could be mitigated through public policy and cultural change.

That’s no longer the case. What the Left is engaged in now is a full-throated rejection of observable reality on moral grounds. Angela Saini commands that you accept that Kenyan performance in distance running is an optical illusion. Cordelia Fine, says, as a women, she knows sex is a social construct, created by men. This is not an inability to grasp the material. It is a conscious desire to forbid certain knowledge, to anathematize noticing the world and the explanations for what we see.

It is popular to talk about this phenomenon in terms of Galileo. The left-wing science deniers are playing the antagonist role of the Church and the humans sciences are in the protagonist role. This is probably comforting to the empirically minded, as it suggests they will eventually triumph in the end. Not only is this a faulty reading of history, particularly the Church, it assumes that human progress is inevitable. That no matter what they do, the march of science will continue unabated.

Instead, what we are seeing could be the signal of a coming dark age. Maybe this is what it was like in 1177 BC. The slow decline in general intelligence leads to a period of anti-knowledge, where knowing how stuff works, or even being curious about it, is seen as a threat to the established order. The brakes are applied and progress is reversed until the point where the people are no longer able to operate the mechanisms of society created by their ancestors.

Support the media that supports you. While all of us toiling in the fields of dissident media are motivated by a sense of duty, having a place to sleep and food on the table still requires money. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. Or, you can send money to me at: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. I now have a PayPal setup for those who prefer that method to donate. Thank you for your support!

Alienation And Its Discontents

If you were to transport into this age, someone from a prior age, say the 19th century, that person would certainly be amazed at what he saw. From the perspective of this age, the assumption is he would be most impressed with the technological advances relative to his time. The ability to easily communicate with people, from all over the globe, would probably be the most dazzling. Instead of waiting weeks for a letter from a friend, we exchange e-mails and texts instantly from wherever we happen to be standing.

People in the modern West tend to think of progress in purely material terms, so that would be the thing most people think of in this thought experiment. Our communication systems are better. Our transportation systems are better. Our food and entertainments are vastly more plentiful, if not necessarily better. It’s not unreasonable to think that 19th century man would marvel at a fast food drive through. To him, at least in a material sense, this age is beyond the world of fantasy.

Something else would probably stun 19th century man. That is the lack of human interaction compared to his time. This is one of those counter-intuitive things for people in this age, because this age is awash in communications. Everywhere you turn, the rulers are sending messages to you about the latest products you must consume or the most recently approved thoughts you should promote. Humans in this age are awash in mass media, which bombards us wherever we go.

When you look past that top layer, however, what you see is people “interfacing” with one another, but very few people bonding and interacting. Look at the typical customer service experience. You call and someone, from somewhere, responds to your prompts, using a script provided to them by the software in the call center. Increasingly, the customer service agent is a robot. Most people order their prescriptions, for example, from a robot, not a pharmacist. It is purely transactional.

This sterilization of human interaction is not limited to the impersonal contact we make with global corporations. Inside the corporation, relationships are increasingly automated and systematized. Managers are trained to use management systems to interface with their direct reports. Staff is no longer encouraged to be loyal to a manager, as that is as sensible as being loyal to the coffee machine. The manager is just an entity that inputs data into the management system.

The argument in favor of automation in the work place is it reduces errors and lowers costs, but often the driving force is to limit human interaction. The shift supervisor, so used to dealing with systems in his life, is unequipped to actually manage human beings on a personal level. Instead of monitoring their work and correcting their errors, adjusting for personality, he posts their efficiency reports in the break room, along with all of the other management metrics that come from the quality control system.

This is something people in the process management world have come to understand about the modern workplace. It’s not as much about efficiency as about the fact that young people no longer possess the social skills that were an assumed part of society just a couple of generations ago. The young manager does not have the social skills to confront an underling over an error or the intuition to encourage someone who needs a little motivation to get through a difficulty.

The general reputation of millennials in the work place is that they are self-absorbed, needy and entitled. Companies have responded to this with tighter structures that remove the need for initiative and adaptability. In reality, the cause of the problem is a generation of people raised by robots. The well-adapted millennials are those who played sports or served in the military. In those environments, stripped of automation, they learned how to be leaders, teammates and adapt to new conditions.

This is not just a workplace phenomenon. This post from the London School of Economics is amusing in many ways, but one line jumps out. “Occupational segregation matters because it can lead to inequality between workers and limit the talent pool for employers trying to fill a position.” The sterility of language will remind anyone over the age of 40 of the jokes made about communism. That’s a line that would seem at home in a provincial report on the latest five year plan.

This is something you see all over the social sciences. It’s why the author of the post claims, with a straight face, that economists are baffled as to why homosexuals are clustered into certain fields. Within living memory, people just knew why this was and did not think much about it. It was so obvious, it was assumed everyone knew it. In the atomized transactional world of today, humans are the most baffling thing to their fellow humans. No one knows anything about themselves now.

Part of this is the result of multiculturalism. That man brought here from a century ago would have been snatched from a world in which everyone was like him. If he was a city dweller, he may have bumped up against other tribes of immigrants or natives, but his daily life was spent around his people. What he knew about those other people was through the lens of his understanding of himself and his people. It was not through a description in a textbook or from a class on human development.

Today we live in a world of strangers. White communities have been shattered, along with the sense of community. In fact, whites are no longer permitted to have a sense of community. Since most of what makes the modern world possible is still run by whites, the result is a world run by deracinated strangers in a sea of alienation. Those management systems are simply a response to this reality. It’s a solution to slow what is the inexorable process of multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism.

There’s also the fact that technology has not just made stuff cheaper. It has changed how humans interact with the world. This shows up in standardized testing. Young people are better at taking tests, because they live in a world of tests. Their games are structured along the same lines as a standardized test. Instead of a free form world of play, it is the range of options available in the video game. Instead of problem solving, it is leaning the combination of available inputs.

This transactional existence is not without its consequences. The alienation that is a daily part of modern life manifests as nostalgia throughout the culture. Hollywood movies are either based on childhood items, like super heroes, or remakes of shows from when America was not this way. The rising tide of populism and ethno-nationalism, particularly among the youth, is a romantic response to a modern world that offers plenty of ways to use your time, but no answer for how to live.

That’s what would most shock and horrify 19th century man about this age. He could live without the instant communications, but he could not live a life in which no one had anything to say or a reason to say it. He could live without modern transportation, but he could not live without a place to a go or a people to visit. He could not live alone in a world full of strangers. It’s all those close, smelly, sweaty connections with your people that makes you human. He could not live without that and in a probability, neither can we.

Support the media that supports you. While all of us toiling in the fields of dissident media are motivated by a sense of duty, having a place to sleep and food on the table still requires money. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. Or, you can send money to me at: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. I now have a PayPal setup for those who prefer that method to donate. Thank you for your support!

Self-Loathing As Medicine

At the national conservatism conference, a recurring theme of the speeches was the awfulness of identity politics. The speakers would not get into the details, beyond noting it made unifying the country impossible. There were no references to black identity or the variety of group identities coming from the grievance studies departments. They would just refer to it in the same way that people refer to drug taking of drunk driving. That is, these are obviously immoral things that good people know to avoid.

The thing is though, this sort of talk only occurs in front of white people. Despite all the invective aimed at people on the dissident right, about their alleged racism, there was not a lot of diversity at the conference. A back of the envelope count says it was 65% white, 30% Jewish and 5% other. It may have been more Jewish than that, but not every Jew wears a yarmulke. Regardless, there may have been one black person and a few dozen people of mysterious origins. No a lot of vibrancy.

In other words, despite the hooting about white racism, the room was full of white people, who spend most of their time around white people or fellow whites. The typical black person experiences vastly more diversity in his daily life. Even the emotionally crippled women of the gender studies department get more diversity. The point being, Joe Sobran’s line about liberals applies to the various types of conservatives and now these newfangled national conservatives.

Putting that aside though, the typical white person in America really and truly does think identity politics is a bad thing. They look at the alternatives to the bourgeois civic nationalism of their lives and see that it is a shabby alternative. In fact, non-white identity politics can only exist where white people are in sufficient numbers to keep the water flowing and the lights working. That’s because identity politics is actually just anti-white politics. It is an entirely negative identity.

No public white person would dare say such a thing, but that’s the truth of it and more and more white people are waking up to it. The old paleocons can pearl-clutch this stuff all they like, but there is no turning back from it. Lecturing white America on the dangers of identity politics is now getting people killed. The only responsible thing to say in front of a white audience on the subject is the truth. What animates the new faces of the Democrat party, for example, is a hatred of white people.

Of course, one reason why the people railing against identity politics do so exclusively in front of white audiences is they fear this truth settling in on whites. That’s why tirades against white nationalism often coincide with the tirades against identity politics. They are two sides of the same coin, which is a fear that whites will begin to see their collective interests as primary. If in the next election whites vote their skin, Trump wins a fifty state landslide and 70% of the popular vote.

At the risk of over-making the point, these lectures to whites about identity politics are more insidious than they seem at first blush. The temptation is to assume it is just bourgeois white people extolling civic nationalism, by criticizing anything that undermines civic unity. Alternatively, it is a way for these people to puff out their chests and declare that it is the Democrats who are the real racists. Even today, this is a wildly popular tick among the civic nationalist types.

There’s something more important about these lectures. They are built on the assumption that the worst of all identity politics is white identity politics. Blacks embracing their racial awareness is not only ignored, but often celebrated by the same people fretting over white identity. Jewish identity, of course, is the greatest of all possible things. A multi-million dollar celebration of it was just staged in the capital, along with hundreds of media people, marched in to report on it.

White identity, well, that’s the worst and that’s why these lectures against identity politics never happen in front of non-whites. David French does not spend his days going to colleges demanding they junk their black studies departments. The boys at various Koch Brothers rackets are not going to the grievance studies departments, holding seminars on the dangers of identity politics. Instead, rants against identity politics are only aimed at white audiences, because white identity is what they fear.

When you witness this stuff up close, it is hard not to get angry about it and develop a deep loathing for the people behind it. When a Tucker Carlson does a bit on the evils of identity politics, one has to wonder if he is really an asset. To perpetuate white self-loathing in an age of racial politics and minority-majority demographics is to invite terror upon white people. To anathematize whites in order to prevent white identity is to counsel the victim to just like back and take it.

In fairness, a lot of the hooting about identity politics from civic nationalists is just alienation dressed up as nostalgia. They feel the same loss the rest of us feel for an America that is never going to return. Those on this side of the great divide have come to terms with it and seek to build a new identity that provides community and a sense of purpose. The civic nationalist just wallow in the self-pity and nostalgia. They are the new flagellants, who think more self-harm will solve the problem.

Support the media that supports you. While all of us toiling in the fields of dissident media are motivated by a sense of duty, having a place to sleep and food on the table still requires money. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. Or, you can send money to me at: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. I now have a PayPal setup for those who prefer that method to donate. Thank you for your support!